July 13, 2009

At the heart of the Ricci case, which Judge Sonia Sotomayor attempted to bury so that it couldn't be appealed when she heard it by upholding the lower court's anti-Ricci decision without an opinion (outraging her mentor Judge Jose Cabranes), is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Four-Fifths Rule.

This regulation says that on any employment test, the lowest scoring ethnic group better pass at a rate at least 80% as high as the highest scoring ethnic group.

The fashionable Advanced Placement tests provide us with a database to test the reasonableness of the rule that gives the Disparate Impact theory its teeth. As I mention in post below, blacks only pass AP tests at a per capita rate not Four-Fifths but One-Twentieth of the Asian rate.

But what about just those more elite students who bother to take AP tests? How reasonable is the Four-Fifths rule for them?

The gaps are smaller, but not a single AP exam would pass the EEOC's Four-Fifth's Rule, as the table below shows. (And many colleges require not just scores of 3, but 4s or 5s, which make the racial gaps substantially larger.)

The counter would go -Blacks attend worse schools.Mexicans attend worse schools.Asians aren't as negatively stereotyped as Blacks and Mexicans.The tests are culturally biased, somehow.The tests don't tell you anything about how these kids will do as (whatever the test pertains to).It's racist to make this list - (TRUMP CARD).

"This regulation says that on any employment test, the lowest scoring ethnic group better pass at a rate at least 80% as high as the highest scoring ethnic group."

Just IMAGINE if we could subsitute "trailer park whites" or "starter-home-whites" instead of "lowest scoring ethnic group" when we had those same working-class whites apply for private colleges and the better public universities. Would if it were some pressure group could tell Harvard that their admissions tests were "classicist" if the trailer-park whites didn't as a group score 4/5 as well as the wealthy kids did, and that Harvard would be FORCED to make a new test that trailer-park whites did 80% as well on average as their more tradional applicants did, and hence many trailer-park whites had to not only get into Harvard, but recieve a share of scholarships into Harvard also.

Could you IMAGINE the gnashing of teeth in academia over that? Trailer kids walking the ground in Harvard Yard? Harvard cannot be "economically-prejudiced" can it?

Wow, maybe Sessions should ask Sotomayor if she is going to ban AP tests and the SAT.

If elite universities are deprived of their tools for determining who the smartest students are, they might regress to ordinary Podunk colleges. Then students across the country would have to be judged by their actual academic accomplishments giving them a strong incentive to pick colleges with the best curriculum and instructors.

Imagine that: Hillsdale and Thomas Aquinas College rated at the top of the Newsweek Kaplan College Guide.

There are a large number of people who understand that the primary function of higher education nowadays is to maintain a government supported monopoly on granting the equivalent of life patents of nobility in exchange for destroying the critical faculties of people entering positions of influence. The no-bankruptcy student debt is an added bonus which so burdens these "young professionals" that they dare not think even if they could, after what their "education" does to them.

Everyone (who counts) wins.

So what better way to destroy this "institution" than to file a class-action lawsuit on behalf of all the minority students denied "advanced placement"?

There have to be literally tens of billions of contingencies here for some entrepreneurial law firm.

Why doesn't someone bring a lawsuit against the ETS for violationg the EEOC's regulation for the AP test (and while at that for the LSAT as well). We could be shocked, shocked at what is going on here and demand that the law schools (including Havard and Yale) not rely on such tests.

Actually, since graduating from College and in particular Tier 1 Colleges is a pre-requisite to employment in most prestigious business (and government, and government-business in the Obama era) opportunities, you can expect major patronage operations from Obama, Holder, and Sotomayor.

To wit -- abolishing the SAT, LSAT, GMAT, MCAT, and pretty much every other test and imposition of full quotas.

Blacks come first, with admittance based on patronage (think Michelle Obama at Univ. of Chicago Hospital). Then Hispanics, then Women, then Gays. Finally, any spots left go to un-connected White men (legacy White guys get in as always of course, providing their families make big donations).

What this does is cut off higher education which has been a mortal threat to the Elites since the GI Bill put a dagger to their throat. Since it's White men who form the competitive threat to elite domination.

Naturally, the productivity of most institutions with quotas will be terrible, and medicine, law, accounting, and any other profession with the new quota system will be horrible -- a monstrosity of incompetence that can never be rooted out because it would be by law a "hate crime." Explicitly outlawed. This is disparate impact in action.

HOWEVER, the patronage ability, particularly in maintaining the electoral alliance of Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, and of course White Women, is of enormous interest. That is how politics works, slicing up the pie, the who and whom. Lenin got that right.

The upshot of the AP tests is not "EEOC does not work" but rather, "throw out the AP tests and institute mandatory quotas" followed by that for every profession.

Because every Congressman, Senator, and bureaucrat now gets to decide who goes to College, and who does not. Even better, keeping White boys from College has been the Holy Grail of the Leftist political alliance for some time. Think. There's limited slots. Its a zero sum game. For Blacks, Hispanics, and Women to win (not very many Gays to count one way or another) White guys have to lose.

The political advantages are obvious and enormous. It's making the Chicago Way national. Expect it.

* the elite universities aren't all there is. If they dumb themselves down too far they lose their brand. A degree from other universities will become a better way to get a job, and the USA is really big. I am pretty sure there is a creepy conspiracy going on behind the scenes as you describe, but the people running it forgot that this isn't Rhodesia. There are a LOT of universities out there.

Look what's happened to comp sci programs. They tried to dumb themselves down to attract more women, and the result was nobody cares about your comp sci degree. It has nearly zero signalling value.

* there is nothing magic about the credentialed professions as a route to money and status. When the gatekeeping you describe really kicks in in earnest, the credentialed professions will lose their prestige in the same way quotas will destroy the prestige of the elite universities.

Your scenario is pretty scary with regards to medicine, if you don't think it through all the way. But what happens when the title of medical doctor is handed out as a racial spoil? I'll tell you what happens: people start to trust - and demand treatment by and payment to - nurses and other hcps, all the less prestigious, less politicized professions where the smarter people have been moving to already.

Another thing you're not taking into account is that for this to work Asians have to play ball, and why should they?

This isn't Africa. Our systems are too complex and too resilient to be hacked like this.

Iwas browsing www.volokh.com reading their comments about Sotomayor and had to laugh. Nota single one of them pointed to the pathetic pass rate of blacks on the bar exam. All The learned college prof discourse regarding Ricci and they were dancing all around the elephant in their own living room.

Big talk about Ginzburg and her jabbering about how SHE would write a fireman's test, yet no one pointed out the massive hypocrisy of pimping a bar exam that is likely a much greater "disparate impacter" than the New Haven fireman's test ever was.

Those boys have the biggest racial discriminator staring them right in the face, yet they refuse even to notice it.

They're just plain scared. As I remember, their boy Bernstein used to hang out with the Libertarian white boys but even he was not going to point out the obvious back at HLS.

AP tests aren't a representative sample. Only a third of the students who take AP courses take the tests, and schools have widely varying incentives for encouraging or discouraging students from taking the test. Schools with predominantly low performing students have a high incentive to make all students take the test (making the Challenge Index), and students with mostly high performing students want to keep their overall average up and could care less about the Challenge Index. And that's just for starters.

There's very few meaningful conclusions to be drawn from the data, except that far more low performing girls are taking AP courses than low performing boys--but that's obvious from SAT/ACT scores as well.

"The upshot of the AP tests is not "EEOC does not work" but rather, "throw out the AP tests and institute mandatory quotas" followed by that for every profession."

Actually I think that's not a bad solution to the constant bickering about race. Once you have quotas, the deal is done. Except they should be based on numerical proportions and not on patronage. This can be arranged in law, i.e. if Obama stuffs too many blacks or white women in a place you just go to the labor court and get thing sorted out again.

Proportional political systems are pervasive in most western public institutions. It means you have enough competent people, usually from the liberal and conservative parties, to keep things working. And then you have the usual suspects from the socialists and Greens, who just sit on the gravy train and make lots of noise, and irritate the locomotive stoker. But somehow it works, and the advantage is that all the bickering of the losers becomes controllable.

I'd say white males should stop fighting over AA and jut accept a full quota system, but insist that it stays within the bounds of numerical representation. White guys dominate free enterprise anyway, so if you have as many guys in the civil service, as your numbers allow, you have enough penetration to basically determine the course of governance, albeit with a lot of baggage. Yu just have to make sure you send in your best team. But it’s a more effective system than the current dysfunctional bickering of the spoils and these endless anti-AA measures which are usually passed but then blocked by the likes of Sotomachismo. Gotta say that chick is not exactly a Sophia Loren.

I'm impressed with the NAM performance on BC and E&M. Whats the N on these?

Any data on fee waivers? Lots of all-black/hispanic "magnet" schools with plenty of grant money encourage these tests even if they may not be prepared. Since lots of them are low-income or "at-risk", college board pays for the test. So the stakes aren't too high for them.

Sailer is a radical scientific theorist, and not a conservative, or a traditionalist. He was always so, of course. It makes sense that he would become a major intellectual force on the supposed "radical right wing" of American politics.

Yes, that was a new high water mark in Steve Sailer radicalism a couple threads back when he called upon white Midwestern Americans to assimiliate to the Asian immigrants and their alien Asian cultural perspective on institutional education programs: Apparently every white student now needs to become a studyholic rote-learning grind---in order to prosper in the New America.

Yeah, baby! Tell us how you really feel. What's next? Sarkozy-like calls for mass miscegenation from the old iSteve?

Tell us, Steve, what does it mean when Asians dramatically outperform all other racial groups in the study of Music Theory? The statistical proof is right there in front of your nose in your neat table. Asians kick ass in that particular discipline. And you seem to understand the music discipline judging from your articles on everything from classical to rap.

So do those testing results of yours prove that Asians have a deeper understanding of music? And might then the cause be due either to genetics or Asian work-ethic values or maybe both? Why don't you tell us, Steve? Why don't you explain how those stats comport with the reality of the music world today and the reality of the music world throughout recorded history?

How does it all add up? When Asian Music Theory scores are by far the highest but Asian Music Reality scores are something very few global citizens care to expose their ears to for any length of time?

Sorry folks. It can be stated as fact that the world does not hold dear the catalog of Asian musical output. Yes, we know that to be true, Steve. So how do we reconcile the classroom tests with the real world?

The answer is that we can logically infer that the testing is measuring certain abilities, but not other abilities that come into play in the real world. And from that realization we can logically infer that a national elite [intellectual class], who have achieved their top status largely based on testing results, brings with it no guarantee of high performance, or (gulp) even basic competence, in the real world application.

Quo vadis, America? The Steve Sailer Way---All Hail the Continually Expanding and Improving Testing Regime---just might be one reason the American nation is now hobbled by an intellectual bankrupt "cognitive elite".

In many areas, taking Japanese is one way for someone in a mediocre school district to attend a better high school if the original school doesn't offer Japanese. So a lot of whites take Japanese but don't really learn it well. However, they got what they wanted -- the chance to attend a higher quality high school.

If NAMs are granted admission to elite colleges at rates higher than they would in a fair admissions process, and if Asians and Jews are admitted at rates higher than they would be in a quota system, how much lower is the NAJ ("non Asian or Jewish") admissions rate under the current system than the admissions rate for NAJs under a quota system?

1. Why does it apply to medical, law and professional grad school/employment opportunities and not entertainment/sports? Isn't saving lives, seeking a just society and keeping planes flying more important than putting a ball in a net which means nothing a day after the championship game?

2. Why isn't AA practiced at the level where it matters most like co-ethnicities rather than abstract race classifications (like India, China and Malaysia practice). Arn't small, highly cohesive groups like ethnic Chinese, Indians, Koreans and Jews the most successful ethnic units far beyond their proportion and what is 'fair' (not the 'Asians' like the Hmong or Polynesians or 'Caucasians' like the Portugese)?

3. More accurately, why not do away with race or ethnicity as a proxy for the more fundamental statistical inequality between groups - IQ or better yet 'g' to avoid any kind of racism, ethnicism or other groupism? We have the technology to assess an individual's gifts and even motivation to some degree and handicap them appropriately throughout life to give less gifted and motivated individuals a 'level' playing field.

4. What about AA based upon net assets (and the social connections that come with them) rather than race, ethnicity, IQ or stated income. Net assets and elite networks are where astronomical inequalities have arisen between individuals and classes of people - far more than stated income or IQ. A just society would start their AA playing field leveling here.

It seems every high functioning niche of our economy somehow finds a way to avoid the EEOC's 4/5th rule.

Walk the Googleplex in Mountain View, CA and tell me how many NAM and female employees you find in the guts of the organization? How many hedge funds or Goldman Sachs employees? How many patent holders or tech/drug startup teams?

Small business under 20 or 50 employees are exempt from many regulations like EEOC's, but tell me how Google or Goldman avoids targeted by lawsuits?

Goldman and Google are great examples of large organizations, by income(GS) and headcount(GOOG, of how exceptional organizations somehow find a way to avoid EEOC's 4/5th regulation. Both efficiently collect the farthest right tail of the human talent distribution and their results show this.

While Goldman is not nearly as large as Google, it is well over the 20-50 employee limit that exempts them from federal employment laws and regulations. Again, I don't understand how they avoid constant lawsuits and get away with their blatantly discriminatory hiring practice.

Interestingly, I've heard that many federal government organizations actively discriminate against Ivy League or other elite schools and heavily favor graduates from historically black colleges. I would expect that many federal government branches violate the 4/5ths regulation in favor of African-Americans. If the stats could be gathered, this violation of EEOC against non-African-Americans in the federal government would make an interesting Stevil post.

the problem with developing a *meritocratic elite* based on testtaking is you end up with a very high % of conformist bootlickers in charge of the society.

america was not made great by conformists. i don't believe the asian nations have been well served by their extreme conformist cultures.

ancient imperial china's superior testtaking regime doesn't mean anything for us here today in america. if that's what works for chinese in their society well let them have it.

but we know what works for us here in america and that is a chaotic freewheeling market of brainpower where all sorts of oddballs; weirdos; eccentrics; misfits; rebels; rule breakers; lunatics; misunderstood geniuses...can continually shake up the establishment.

americans do not understand what a clampdown society is like but they will find out if the testtaking crowd completes its national mission of total intellectual conformity.

"Sorry folks. It can be stated as fact that the world does not hold dear the catalog of Asian musical output. Yes, we know that to be true, Steve. So how do we reconcile the classroom tests with the real world?

The answer is that we can logically infer that the testing is measuring certain abilities, but not other abilities that come into play in the real world."

The AP program is not a Grand Theory of Everything. The material on the test represents the contents of the course. The test measures whether the test taker knows content. That's it.

I'd say white males should stop fighting over AA and jut accept a full quota system, but insist that it stays within the bounds of numerical representation.

I think "who? Whom?" needs acknowledging too. There's something creepy about Jews being gung-ho for the multicult, then blending into whites when the music stops (so they get to outnumber non-Jewish whites at Harvard, for example).

Says Cal:AP tests aren't a representative sample. Only a third of the students who take AP courses take the tests, and schools have widely varying incentives for encouraging or discouraging students from taking the test. Schools with predominantly low performing students have a high incentive to make all students take the test (making the Challenge Index), and students with mostly high performing students want to keep their overall average up and could care less about the Challenge Index.

So the argument is that good White and Asian scores are concentrated by schools not pressing mediocres to take the APs, while Black and Hispanic good scores are diluted by schools trying to match the Challenge Index and getting as many students to sit the APs as possible.

This isn't a refutation of Steve's point--it's exactly the point he goes out of his way to make in his Vdare column. Even with the massive increase in Black and Hispanic AP sitting Whites and Asians still sit for them at multiples of the Black and Hispanic percentages! Making the Black and Hispanic samples more representative vis-a-vis the White and Asian ones is only going to make things go much worse from Cal's perspective. What will happen to their scores when they sit for the exams at the White (to say nothing of the Asian) rate? Think, man!

The USA testing industry is an efficient proving grounds for want-to-be intellectual elites IF you want to produce the sort of system we now have...and a majority of people in this country like the system we now have.

Definitely a majority believe that on a fundamental level the USA is on the right track and if you include those who are content enough in their own lives to not even participate in politics for the past 10-20-30 years then the numbers passively supporting the macro status quo are huge.

The whole national opinion situation is very odd because the country really is falling apart on so many levels. Yeah the pocketbook issues are really hitting home now but don't expect the masses to be able to connect a failing economy with a failed ideology in academia.

The people deserve their leaders and their government and they deserve it good and hard. I have friends and co-workers willing to junk the constitution right now in exchange for a lifelong cradle-to-grave nanny state. Those kind of people are out there in huge numbers. A lot of them do very well on SAT tests.

Responding to the repeated reminder that test scores aren't everything, so Steve should stop focusing on them: partly true, but missing the point. Testing isn't everything, but it has actual predictive value. The baseball geek who can recite the infield fly rule verbatim may not be as good a manager as someone who manages people well. But knowing what the infield fly rule is in a general way is absolutely necessary to being a manager, as is the double-switch, the balk rule, and other relative obscurities. Measurability is an enormous advantage in evaluation, and tests often identify the necessary minimums very well. Thus, they deserve attention as stepping stones to the more general issues. An individual with poor test scores might succeed in any number of occupations on the strength of other qualities. But we can't assume that a pool of lower-scoring participants will all have greater compensating factors than those with better scores. As a group, they will be less successful.

I didn't say it was. I said that AP data isn't a representative sample. Thus no conclusions can be drawn.

I don't dispute that there'd be a performance gap. But there is a fair bulk of higher performing whites and NAMs that aren't taking the classes, much less the test. So there's no way to know what the actual data would look like.

The education filters (tests) in American education are likely preventing significant numbers of Thomas Edison types from advancing each year. Much effort in the testing industry should be concentrated on making sure that eccentric geniuses don't fall through the cracks. There are some organizations out there and some employers that seem to be aware of this issue. A single Thomas Edison type can have the impact of any 10 million random employees. Maybe 100 million. A list of perhaps 1000 visionaries out of the entire history of America were the ones that made the crucial breakthroughs in all the various affairs of the country.

In this light any education system that pounds the original thinking out of the students is a criminal enterprise. Keep in mind that the elites really don't appreciate visionaries and great geniuses. The elites want dumbed down laborers and competent clerks. The elites invented the AP system and the SAT and all of the other hurdles that prevent original thinkers from advancing. Much of the American testing industry was probably initially developed by the Pentagon or intelligence community. That is where much of the social engineering actually comes from.

Edison was not all that smart: he was dogged persistent and really liked inventing stuff, but he was probably not over 120 to 130 IQ. A really bright person would not have tested hundreds of materials to find a suitable light bulb filament, but would have approached it from an analytical angle.

That was also true of Tesla, Marconi, Edwin "FM" Armstrong and many other inventors. Curiosity and a drive to tinker were their dominant traits, not so much raw cognitive power.

An example of a real genius was Charles P. Steinmetz, who really made AC power work.

"Actually I think that's not a bad solution to the constant bickering about race. Once you have quotas, the deal is done."

I sort of agree, actually. We talk a lot about the high achievers getting held back, but what about the average and below average White Guys who are just looking for a paycheck? Right now we have quotas that only work one way - professions like nursing and teaching are overwhelmingly female and federal government drones here in DC are overwhelmingly black, but one would be laughed out of the room if you demanded quotas for whites and/or men. At least with strict, approximate quotas that work both ways there would be some semblance of fairness to the system.

"Testing isn't everything, but it has actual predictive value. The baseball geek who can recite the infield fly rule verbatim may not be as good a manager as someone who manages people well."

I think a better analogy would be the NFL combine. Sure, not everyone who can run a 4.3 40-yard dash, bench 30 reps at 225, and score a 30 on the Wonderlic is going to be a great football player. But they're sure as hell more likely to be one than someone who runs a 4.9, does 5 reps, and scores a 12. The first guy is an absolute freak of nature, while you can find a guy like #2 pretty easily at your local gym.

The NFL does an orgy of tests like these, and they're evaluating candidates for whom they already have 40-60+ hours of game film. Just as there are things that are hard to measure on tests, there are things that are hard to measure in "real-world" situations. And just because it's hard to measure doesn't mean that it doesn't matter.

Some of you mock the logical extention of eliminating the best objective criteria we have to predict performance (and thus society's return on it's investment in students). Keep in mind, the predictive ability of IQ is better than nearly most every other complex metric of human behavior.

Laugh no more, it's already happening as a growing number of colleges and universities are making the SAT/ACT optional and CA is eliminating the SAT Subject Tests in it's university admissions policy.

Even if they reduce the admissions application to a strict quota system with requiring only a color photograph with cheek swab to determine race and one multiple checkbox question for any minority status (e.g. gay, transgender, learning disabled, left handedness, hermaphordite etc) how does one determine what fair target quota levels are?

For example, African-Americans are about 12% of the population, and black males about 6%. A disproportionate number of black males don't graduate H.S., don't apply to colleges, are not perpared/qualified for work at top colleges and do not major in difficult majors like math, physics, chemistry, engineering, the softer life sciences or even the harder liberal arts like philosophy and incresingly quantitative economics. Say black males represent only 2% of the loosly qualified applicants to a top school.

So what should the "just" percentage of black males be in a top college? Six or two percent? Assuming the vast majority of black males avoid 50% of the harder fields of study, should the easier fields accept double the "fair" percentage so the college overall meets it's target? Should the college create more easy "make work" majors like identity studies so under represented minorities can find majors they feel comfortable in and raise their overall percentages?

The future looks complicated. The logical end of today's policies, demographic trends and HBD realties point to a hard quota system ala Malaysia. It's just too early in the cycle to drop the noble lie on the (temporary) majority that will shoulder most of the pain.

Take a minute to google Edison's life. Some highlights include his frustration at school and getting his first real job at 12. Saved a kid's life from a railroad accident. Married a 16 year old when he was 24. Owned his own lab.

All in all, it beats what I was doing from 12 to 25. Probably a lot better than a "gifted" program in a government school. However not the life of a beta. Confidence required.

I said that AP data isn't a representative sample. Thus no conclusions can be drawn.

This is the kind of errant pedantry one sees in students with at most one Stats or Logic class under their belts. AP data isn't a representative sample of what? Of all high school students? Whoever claimed it was? Before tying yourself up in knots about that, understand that jumping up and down crying 'the sample isn't representative' isn't, in itself, sufficient to show much of anything. It's incumbent on you to understand 1) whether Steve is making a sampling argument at all; 2) if he is, what the argument is; and 3) in which direction(s) his sample is off, according to your intuitions about the domain.

Judging by what you say later:

I don't dispute that there'd be a performance gap. But there is a fair bulk of higher performing whites and NAMs that aren't taking the classes, much less the test. So there's no way to know what the actual data would look like.

you should wait until you get a better handle on whatever chapter you're on in your intro class before you sally forth again. You're all over the map, or maybe not even on it at all. A little learning can be a dangerous thing.

How predictive are HS recruit rankings or NFL Combine results/Draft Pick order in predicting success at the next level?

Given the relatively high predictive power of things like 'g'/SAT (raw talent) and SAT subject/GPA (motivation) for university performance and graduation, I wouldn't be surprised if they were as powerfully predictive as the sports testing analogies (which would surprise many).

"All in all, it beats what I was doing from 12 to 25. Probably a lot better than a "gifted" program in a government school."

Uhhhh...Something tells me, Buddy that you weren't brought up in the 1860s.

"Conformist bootlickers don't proclaim themselves racists. Not that that's the only way to go."

I'm just joking with Ole' Sviggey. He's actually somewhat Iconoclastic. If I had to guess I would say that he does Ghost Tours, or works for a restoration society down there in Charleston, or does something else extremely SWIPPLE; much to the consternation of his mother.

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.